In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation
- Katherine Failla
- 1:19-cv-09236
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation: Judge Failla granted the defendants’ request to seal seven exhibits and terminated the related motion.
The B/T Defendants, their customers, third parties, and certain nonparty employees whose information was included in the exhibits; the order also affects public access to those exhibits by allowing them to be filed under seal.
What happened
In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation concerns the B/T Defendants’ request to file seven exhibits under seal. The defendants said the exhibits contained sensitive information about crypto accounts, transactions, customers, third parties, and certain employees’ personal trading.
The court granted the application. It directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 362.
Judge Katherine Failla issued the order on May 25, 2023.
The detailed version
- In re Tether and Bitfinex Crypto Asset Litigation · No. 1:19-cv-09236
- Katherine Failla
- May 25, 2023
Background
The B/T Defendants asked for permission to file Exhibits 1 through 7 under seal in connection with their motion for clarification. They represented that the exhibits included correspondence between the parties and documents produced by the B/T Defendants. According to their request, the materials contained detailed and sensitive information about the crypto accounts and transactions of the B/T Defendants, their customers, and third parties, as well as personal crypto-trading information involving certain employees who were not parties to the case.
Ruling
The court granted the application to file the exhibits under seal. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 362.
Effect
The order allowed Exhibits 1 through 7 to be filed under seal and ended the identified pending motion on the docket. Judge Katherine Polk Failla dated the order May 25, 2023.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.